Bill wrote:It is true that the allocation history is central accounting records, and can be quite different from reality, especially when conformance to central budgets for locomotive costs needed to be controlled in an ingenious manner.
These "accountany transfers" are one of the biggest problems when you are trying, as I have of course, to put together a locomotive allocation history.
There are examples beyond count of locomotives being "transferred" in the last month or so of their service. Transfers to 9G Gorton was a particular favourite of the accountants, but there were many others.
But of course, just because an engine was transferred in its last month of service and then withdrawn did not ncessarily mean that it was only a "paper transfer." As steam depots closed (and perhaps we could take 82B as an example), Barrow Road got virtually all of the Marsh's allocation at one fell swoop, with insufficient work for all of them to do, so it would only be natural for those in the best of condition to be kept running whilst the "rubbish" went straight to the scrap line. There would also have been many examples of locomotives being transferred, suffering a failure on the way or being "red carded" by the fitters when it arrived, so it too would have gone to "the dump."
Another example of transfers that may or may not physically have taken place was in the autumn of 1965, when a plan was devised to send a number of 84xxx tanks to the isle of Wight to replace the O2s. The idea was that they would go to Eastleigh Works to be modified to fit through Ryde tunnel, and ten of them (84010, 13-17, 19, 25, 26 and 28 ) were "transferred" to Eastleigh to have the work carried out. Then the decision to electrify the remaining IOW section was taken so the idea of modifying the 84xxx tanks was dropped. It is believed that only one of these engines actually got anywhere near Eastleigh, the remainder staying on the LMR, despite the records showing that they had been transferred.
After the plan was dropped, all but one (84025) were shown as being transferred to Stockport Edgeley and then withdrawn in the next month. 84025 was shown as being transferred back to Bolton (where it had been previously) and was also withdrawn the next month.
I presume that Eastleigh didn't have any spare budget to accommodate the depreciation charge on these engines, whilst Stockport Edgeley did!
Just a couple of examples of how trying to put a steam allocation database together is a bit like walking into a minefield
